Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<aqff4j9uidgbfjedffqmn86v4n850ucq0l@4ax.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: how Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 19:26:25 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <uvplr1$1doq2$3@i2pn2.org> References: <qHqKnNhkFFpow5Tl3Eiz12-8JEI@jntp> <yEN9mcjNSFCpZauAmq9PZpqTvbE@jntp> <uvj8dn$9pp1$1@dont-email.me> <E-6dnYXNGokhWoD7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <WWAAjqwU3NYrjHFv9FAJdIPacMA@jntp> <afWdnQSazLMPNIP7nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <xtCcB8eTIiLLKhTUoHKqffY9Xgk@jntp> <uvmklk$145fs$1@dont-email.me> <KDvld5V8nkuMQizbRLOiDVHwY6M@jntp> <uvp8f9$1p75i$1@dont-email.me> <JIsBgBi5Wu8Ns_hoOaJCIIvKSYU@jntp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 23:26:25 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1499970"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <JIsBgBi5Wu8Ns_hoOaJCIIvKSYU@jntp> Bytes: 2316 Lines: 27 On 4/17/24 4:30 PM, WM wrote: > Le 17/04/2024 à 21:38, Tom Bola a écrit : >> WM drivels bullshit again and again, as always: >> >>> Le 16/04/2024 à 21:48, Tom Bola a écrit : >>>> WM schrieb: >>> >>>>> Nevertheless the question remains where in the second row is ω >>>>> located, doesn't it?. >>>> >>>> NOPE - because w is not in the IMAGE of your f(ord) = 2*ord >>> ω*2 is present. Therefore ω or the ordinals next to it must be >>> localized below. >> >> Also, 2, 4, 6, ... are present in the image but not 1, 2, 3, ... > > If you accept set theory, then you have to accept too that there is no > ordinal between ℕ and ω. The interval populated by ℕ is (0, ω). By > doubling the number of elements remains the same, but the populated > interval is (0, ω2) with ω amidst. > > I do not claim that ω is in the image, but it is amidst the interval. > That proves that doubled numbers surpassed it. > > Regards, WM Only the ω doubled passed it. The rest stayed below ω, and no natural number doubled isn't a natural number.